Re: RDFa and its relationship to XHTML

(Note: we're not getting into details of the spec, so I suggest that  
we take the SWBPD list off the cc: list. I'm leaving it on for now to  
make sure that SWBPD folks who want to follow the thread can follow  
it on public-rdf-in-xhtml. But whoever answers this thread next,  
please take SWBPD off the cc list.)

> Thanks. I've added to the latest version, but when I convert to
> xhtml:stylesheet should I add a #?
>
> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml#stylesheet

That is, in fact, a question we have to resolve. The XHTML namespace  
as is is not RDF friendly, as it ends in neither a # nor a /.

Thus, the default XHTML hGRDDL property may need to use a different  
namespace URI.... that's okay, it will all be defined in the hGRDDL  
transform for XHTML1, and XHTML2 (each will have its own transform.)

Elias: the best way to proceed for now is to assume an RDF-friendly  
URI for a default namespace, and see where this leads. Your  
implementation is going to help us iron out these bugs.

CALL FOR HELP: if there are folks interested in hacking code, now's  
the time that the RDFa effort could use significant help! As you can  
see, we're planning on developing hGRDDL transforms for XHTML1,  
XHTML2 (these will transform the existing defaults, like rel="next"),  
microformats, and eRDF. These transforms shouldn't be hard to write,  
but as we write them, we're going to discover all sorts of small  
issues to fix. Now's the time to get into the game and help us  
improve the RDFa spec!

-Ben

Received on Friday, 9 June 2006 12:35:23 UTC